Reality is a dance of numbers

a reply to: Ahadu

You actually have your quarks reversed: there are two ups in a proton and two downs in a neutron.

More generally, when you say reality is a 'dance of numbers', numbers of course are assumed to be 'primal ideas' - and not merely numbers. Numbers are therefore ancillary to the ideas which they express; firstness = undifferentiated wholeness; vagueness; secondness = opposition, reaction; thirdness = representation, reconciliation, expression. These associations are derived from CS Peirce, but they're also fundamentally implied by the nature of the numbers in question.

Three, of course, is probably the deepest number of all. Here is a partial list of three's in the evolution of the organization of matter in the history of the Cosmsos:

I know, I saw it after the 4 hour window. The one on the picture is correct tho. Thanks for noticing 😃👍

"Reality is a dance of numbers"

It really isn't.

What created those numbers? Other numbers?

No. Reality is actually LIVING SPIRIT.

You can't understand reality until you understand what and who the Creator is.

Reality is Music.

a reply to: Ahadu

interesting that you say they have polar properties , the hermetic understanding of the universe is exactly that

alan watts the English philosopher also said as much , that reality is one of polarity

we need both light and dark in order to understand the whole

my maths isnt that great , but I know if you understand maths you have a better chance of understanding reality
what can you tell me about the whole 3 6 9 vortex maths that I always see being mentioned and Nikola Tesla

The ancient chinese also used hexegrams as a form of divination , and people suggest that using quantum random number generators you can extract more and more information about reality

humans are apparently able to manipulate quantum instruments

maybe with a greater understanding of this you could manipulate reality

well we already can in the most crazy of ways

I also find it really interesting that your patterns also look like stuff on double slit experiments or something
and one of the multiplication things looks like the Jewish candle thing

and Metatrons cube and the flower of life in there
maths is cool I just wish My brain understood it more , I think my brain is more into the creation side rather than the analytical side
I was always better at art and making things than I am at maths, I was good at it in highschool but i was too easily distracted

a reply to: Shoujikina

you cant understand something so vastly complicated , the human mind cannot fathom such a thing as we only experience a tiny proportion of its true majesty

many tibetan monks and zen buddhists , hindu yogis have said that one cannot expect to achieve or understand god/shiva/the dharma , the god head in a single lifetime

I also agree with J B S Haldane

"I have no doubt that in reality the future will be vastly more surprising than anything I can imagine. Now my own suspicion is that the Universe is not only queerer than we suppose, but queerer than we can suppose."

a reply to: sapien82


Hello 👋😁👍

- I've checked out vortex math. It's cool but it's also incomplete.
3 6 9 are special only in a C@9 system & even that could change if we chose to use other completons as the spin axis.



And I think Tesla knew more than he said. Too mysterious that man.

-Yes. We could be able to manipulate reality to a greater extent if we could properly integrate this new understanding with existing fields of science and tech.

-Yes. It has a lot of mystical and scientific implications.

- Me too. I was bad at math in school.😅 so don't let it discourage you. You have both analytical and artistic capabilities.
I also dabble a little bit in the arts too.
✌😄👍

originally posted by: MissSmartypants
Reality is Music.

Might be

originally posted by: Shoujikina
"Reality is a dance of numbers"

It really isn't.

What created those numbers? Other numbers?

No. Reality is actually LIVING SPIRIT.

You can't understand reality until you understand what and who the Creator is.

I agree it is a 'living something' but I'm curious as to what u define as a "living spirit"?🤔

And you could try to understand a creator through its creations. Eg. artists of the past. It goes both ways.😉 keep an open mind😁👍

a reply to: Ahadu


Subtraction grid for C@9


Power Grid for C@9

a reply to: Ahadu

A bit more on the C@9 binary cubiton

a reply to: Ahadu

a reply to: Shoujikina

"Reality is a dance of numbers"

It really isn't.

No-one can say to you that you do not know Gods face,
But you cannot say to God that he can only have one face.

Numbers exist in religion....

The four letter Hebrew word for God represents the geometric pattern of the tetragrammaton (3d=Metatron’s cube) which is said in some ancient texts to be the primordial emanation of physical reality.

If you look Luke chapter 1 and multiply all the numbers (5 X 6 X 6 X 3 X 8 =4,320)
4320 x 10 in radius of sun in miles
432x432 = speed of light (miles per second).

a reply to: sapien82

Since a child I have been fascinated with the three numbers 3 6 9 but never equated it to anything of importance until I read your comment. I'm off to read some tesla, thanks.

Sorry for not posting anything in a while. I've lost my other account and can't recover it. I'm back tho 😁👍

a reply to: Ahadu

I have already proven that numbers are not something I should even go close to on awakening, but I have to be honest your post made my head hurt.

I found it extremely interesting, and I will return to it, as soon as my old brain is willing to lift some of the shades, and let some sunlight in to its dark recesses.

I am determined to have a better understanding of what you have posted. It looks like you put a lot of thought into your post, and I want to understand it better. I will never be a genius mathematician, but your post may just help me at least understand the numbers.

Thanks.

originally posted by: Ahadu
I know, I saw it after the 4 hour window. The one on the picture is correct tho. Thanks for noticing 😃👍

The four hour window is actually a two hour window, and I swear sometimes I feel like it is less than even two hours.

Just sharing a little info that I wish I had known sooner.

I find your thread interesting as i have been discovering geometry for a while.

I was trying to prove the double slit exp is like an illusion. My geometry was based on 3 expanding and rotating axis'/dims of energy represented in r/g/b colours. L/H/W making up a set of 3 opposite partner pair particles that define the dimensions (f/w, b/w = L), (up, down = H) and (right, left = W).

I made a few posts on here but as i'm not a scientist or mathematician. I found my discoveries hard to explain. I have diagrams based on my discoveries, and they're like your binary cubiton but slightly different. Mine has a cube within a cube and is upside down to your cube. This is anti to mine. Anyway. I didn't get very far on here with it.

I don't actually understand some of the things you have said on here. But am interested to discuss more about the cubes which might explain my model better perhaps.

On another site. While discussing my cubes in a mechanical manner of what i thought to be a unique discovery. It was pointed out to me that i was describing Sir William Rowan Hamilton's quaternions and octonions. Already well over 200 years ago. To me, they fit my diagrams if i replace i/j/k for L/H/W.

*Quarks can be interchanged with numbers in C@9/ base10 to better analyse the system.

*Where 9 will be represening the center/origin or the whole system.

*And the other numbers (one to eight)representing the elements/quarks/charges that make the whole.

*The binary cubiton/geometry of C@9 system is a 3d cube

*3 and 6 being the spin axis /proton and neutron
(other completons can also be the spin axis)
- Proton (1) is made up of 3 charges of quarks ,DUD
-Neutron (0) is made up of 3 charges of quarks ,UDU

9 for me represents Einstein's tensor points. The centre 0 or 1/2 and eight corners of the cube. And represent the gravitational effect. They are a set of 4 added axis'/dims (through rotational entanglement of energy) after the second complete rotation/spin of the system (octonions). The first complete rotation creating a 3d hyper-sphere (quaternions). The existing 3d aspect becoming a vector space oriented through the six sides of the inner cube, which is offset to the outer cube.

You say your cube is a 3d system. It has L/W/H and is 3d when looked at as a six sided shape. But is it actually 4d when you consider a set of 4 axis' of opposite diagonal partner pairs connected through the centre point?

How is DUD 3 charges of quarks? Down and up is only 2? Unless D is a start point, U is the square of D (U now anti D). And by lengthening/expansion of the axis'/dims and entanglement, D completes it's rotation to be a third point defining the "particle" as complete?

This diagram shows my interpretation of what turned out to be quaternions perhaps.



This one is my interpretation of the hyper-sphere after one complete rotation.



This is after second complete rotation with transform to hyper-cube. Please take note that this is not hexagrams but cubes and it is like an optical illusion. Where you are not seeing the axis running through line of sight connecting the near top and far corners of the outer cube, hidden by the centre. As such. I have not labelled these hidden aspects. They must be considered and accounted for. They are tensors of the 2 corners plus tensor at centre and scalars.

Labels. S= scalar, T = tensor, V= vector. Plus an attempt at protons, electrons, positrons and neutrons. But. My model might be incorrect. Will be interesting to see what you think.

originally posted by: blackcrowe
I find your thread interesting as i have been discovering geometry for a while.

I was trying to prove the double slit exp is like an illusion. My geometry was based on 3 expanding and rotating axis'/dims of energy represented in r/g/b colours. L/H/W making up a set of 3 opposite partner pair particles that define the dimensions (f/w, b/w = L), (up, down = H) and (right, left = W).

I made a few posts on here but as i'm not a scientist or mathematician. I found my discoveries hard to explain. I have diagrams based on my discoveries, and they're like your binary cubiton but slightly different. Mine has a cube within a cube and is upside down to your cube. This is anti to mine. Anyway. I didn't get very far on here with it.

I don't actually understand some of the things you have said on here. But am interested to discuss more about the cubes which might explain my model better perhaps.

On another site. While discussing my cubes in a mechanical manner of what i thought to be a unique discovery. It was pointed out to me that i was describing Sir William Rowan Hamilton's quaternions and octonions. Already well over 200 years ago. To me, they fit my diagrams if i replace i/j/k for L/H/W.

*Quarks can be interchanged with numbers in C@9/ base10 to better analyse the system.

*Where 9 will be represening the center/origin or the whole system.

*And the other numbers (one to eight)representing the elements/quarks/charges that make the whole.

*The binary cubiton/geometry of C@9 system is a 3d cube

*3 and 6 being the spin axis /proton and neutron
(other completons can also be the spin axis)
- Proton (1) is made up of 3 charges of quarks ,DUD
-Neutron (0) is made up of 3 charges of quarks ,UDU

9 for me represents Einstein's tensor points. The centre 0 or 1/2 and eight corners of the cube. And represent the gravitational effect. They are a set of 4 added axis'/dims (through rotational entanglement of energy) after the second complete rotation/spin of the system (octonions). The first complete rotation creating a 3d hyper-sphere (quaternions). The existing 3d aspect becoming a vector space oriented through the six sides of the inner cube, which is offset to the outer cube.

You say your cube is a 3d system. It has L/W/H and is 3d when looked at as a six sided shape. But is it actually 4d when you consider a set of 4 axis' of opposite diagonal partner pairs connected through the centre point?

How is DUD 3 charges of quarks? Down and up is only 2? Unless D is a start point, U is the square of D (U now anti D). And by lengthening/expansion of the axis'/dims and entanglement, D completes it's rotation to be a third point defining the "particle" as complete?

This diagram shows my interpretation of what turned out to be quaternions perhaps.

This one is my interpretation of the hyper-sphere after one complete rotation.

This is after second complete rotation with transform to hyper-cube. Please take note that this is not hexagrams but cubes and it is like an optical illusion. Where you are not seeing the axis running through line of sight connecting the near top and far corners of the outer cube, hidden by the centre. As such. I have not labelled these hidden aspects. They must be considered and accounted for. They are tensors of the 2 corners plus tensor at centre and scalars.

Labels. S= scalar, T = tensor, V= vector. Plus an attempt at protons, electrons, positrons and neutrons. But. My model might be incorrect. Will be interesting to see what you think.

Hey👋thanks😄🙏awesome work😁👍interesting"quatrinons",u say?🤔lol

honestly tho u'r approach is a bit confusing.🤷‍♂️😅

why are all the axis +(on the first image)?
Shouldn't it be (u+, d-, L+, R-, Fw+, Bw-)?


It works as 4d if u change the 4 pairs of completons into 4 axis. But i didnt want to complicate it more than it needs to be.😅

sorry for the messiness

*Study all the concepts. A lot of things are implied and are compressed.it goes deeper.it'll clarify many things.👍

*Lol I get ur confusion. I used D and U to denote polarity and charge
*D=2,4,8 & U=1,5,7
*D= (-1/3) & U=+2/3
*D=(-) & U=(+)
# DUD/tri852/neutron
D+U+D = D
8+5+2 = 6
(-1/3)+(2/3)+(-1/3)=0
# UDU/tri147/proton
U+D+U =U
1+4+7= 6
(2/3)+(-1/3)+(2/3)=1
😁👍